query_performance

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of row_limit/start_row pagination behavior, the 1000-row default, data freshness (data_state), or Search Console API quota constraints that materially affect calls.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the resource is front-loaded. It is concise to the point of being under-specified for an 11-parameter tool, so brevity here costs more than it saves.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the request side is badly under-covered: 11 parameters at 0% schema description coverage and no guidance on which sibling to prefer. For a complex, open-ended query tool this leaves too much undocumented.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across 11 parameters, so the description carries the full burden and only names two of them ('dimensions', 'filters'). It says nothing about site_url vs account selection, search_type's default of 'web', aggregation_type, data_state, or the paging pair start_row/row_limit.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a concrete verb ('Query') and resource ('Search Analytics performance data') plus the two levers the tool exposes (dimensions, filters), so an agent can tell it retrieves performance metrics. It does not, however, distinguish this from siblings like get_top_queries, get_top_pages, or get_dimension_breakdown, which appear to be convenience wrappers over the same surface.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this generic query tool versus the more specific siblings, and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The agent must infer routing from the tool names alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.